procmail
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: formail source question

1997-02-19 16:33:49
dattier(_at_)wwa(_dot_)com (David W. Tamkin) writes:
...
formail is supposed to honor partial field names for -X and -x, and for the
forms of -I and -i where you don't specify a new value (where you use -I to
delete the header line or -i to change its name to Old-originalname:).  That
facility will not go away.

Now I need to find out whether what I just discovered above about formail -R
will work in future releases.  Only Stephen knows that for sure.  I wrote to
him but he (unsurprisingly) has yet to respond.


I would expect this feature to remain forever.  Two reasons:

a) the source explicitly handles this condition, in a way that indicates
        that it was a concious decision of Stephen's part; and
b) it's documented in the HISTORY file:

1994/08/02: v3.04
            ...
            Changes to formail:
               - Mistakenly turned X-Loop: fields into Old-X-Loop: when
                 autoreplying
               - Allow wildcard -i when autoreplying
               - Renaming short fields to longer fields didn't always work
               - Renaming with a wildcard source/destination is possible now
               - -rk didn't behave correctly if a Content-Length: field was
                 present


You're safe.

Philip Guenther

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>